This photograph winning underlines a lack of empathy for the sufferings of animals. The marmot is obviously terrified and with good reason. This is of course the way of the natural world and for the fox here it is also about survival. But it should not be for our entertainment. Much of what we see on tv about nature involves other species tearing each other apart. The annual Washington joke about the reprieved turkey only reminds of the millions of it's species disemboweled in vast factory complexes across the land. If we respect animals more, only good can come of it.
1
The marmot wasn't startled. It was scared to death. There is no humor in this. There is only horror and terror as the marmot realizes that it is in mortal danger.
Whoever captioned this photo has no ability to comprehend what it means to face your most feared predator. The Fox was doing what it must to survive and feed its young. The marmot was in great fear and knew the Fox was about to pounce and kill it.
This photo is about life and death in the wild. It is not and can never be comical. The wording of the title is unsuitable and inappropriate.
I am heartsick over the thoughtlessness of Natural History Museum of London. "The horror and terror of nature" is more succinct.
21
The Marmot is doing Do-Si-Do. The Fox is doing Lunch.
3
I wish the fox would focus on the rats
And leave that marmot alone.
17
The marmot in the winning photo looks like Louis in "Suits." No?
2
Phenomenal photos. I want to know how the photographers got them.
3
Amazing photo. Zero humor.
13
Even in a photography competition, Tibet is diminished and threatened.... The Tibetan plateau turns into the “Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.”
6
The rat picture just doesn't seem to be on par with the other winners.
3
@XTerrestrial, I worked Downtown for a few years, near where the rats coming into or out of their sewer home were photographed. I thought the juxtaposition of the rat family with the fancily lit establishment in the background captured the essence of the neighborhood.
4
This is only humorous to those who anthropomorphize the marmot as if it were a cartoon character trying to escape the coyote. There are those of us who find fear and suffering on the part of any living thing to be anything but humorous. I understand the circle of life, but I find zero humor it the moments when one living creature must take another living creatures life for survival, and I find no humor in a creature scared for its life. This was a low brow choice worthy of a poorly edited hunting magazine.
31
@Putinski Well said
10
@Putinski
Lighten up. It’s a phenomenal photograph that captures an essential truth about nature.
21
Incredible moments captured, although I could do without the rats!
10
I have not read the rules of the contest, perhaps now they accept obvious fakes, actually very poorly executed montages, as valid entries. It is hard to understand, otherwise, how the grotesquely fabricated pictures of the fox, the rats and, I am almost certain, the puma as well, were not disqualified.
If the rules have not changed, and the raw files must also be submitted, perhaps the organizers should bear in mind that it is also possible to forge raw files, to make it look like the image captures a real event.
@Ajax
Why do you think these photographs are faked? Sharpening subjects and blurring backgrounds are common post capture processing if not in the original photo, and pasting in the marmot or the fox would require hours of processing pixel by pixel to fake it.
Several years ago I had just finished photographing a young green heron when I heard a loud thwack behind me. Turning back I saw the heron now with a broken neck at the feet of a rough-legged hawk, a photo I did capture.
As to the rats, I have captured photos of raccoons emerging from a drain on the Sun Valley Mall and also under the eaves at the main entrance of the Sun Valley Inn. Shouldn't be that hard to set up ones camera near a drain in NYC where one has observed rats before and wait for the capture. I wasn't waiting for the raccoons, just happened to have my camera handy at the moment. But most wildlife photographers know where they are most likely to observe nature at its best (or worst) and have the patience to wait for the "moment."
5
@Ajax On what evidence do you base your accusation that those photographs were "grotesquely fabricated"?
3
Hi, Ajax ~
Your comment tells us all that you're sure that at least a few of these photographs are "grotesquely fabricated."
This news article, and the awards conferred, tell us (perhaps implicitly) that these photographs are not in any way fabricated.
So, you present us all with a clear choice of either number 1 or number 2:
1. Ajax (in Georgia) said it, so it is true.
2. The New York Times and the Natural History Museum of London stake their entire existence upon presenting factually accurate and true information to the entire world, so these photographs are true.
Hmmm, you've given us all a pretty difficult choice to make here, huh?
5
Wonderful photos. Thank you NYT.
6
I think "terrified" is a better description of the marmot's reaction than "comically startled".
37
@H Absolutely correct
9
@H
Animals are beautiful. The photos are excellent, but there's something pornographic about photographing a kill. In most of these pictures, a predator is killing its prey or two male animals are fighting for dominance. I'd rather look at a naked woman in ecstasy, but that's not considered to be art.
5
I fell bad for that marmot, I really do, but I'm happy he got one last Liza Minnelli impression in before becoming lunch.
15
What humor? Seriously.... how is that funny? It is grim and awful, and realistic and true, but not funny. Nothing is comical in the look on that marmot's face, it knows it is about to die.
22
@Callie Absolutely Right!
7
Marmot is in the Heisman pose.
14
Seems the marmot had much less than 15 minutes' worth of fame.
3
Thank you for this wonderful article sharing the beautiful photos. It made my day. With all the craziness of the human world, which I’m constantly reminded of on the pages of the Times recently, it is refreshing to be reminded of the wonders of the natural world. Maybe it would have been better if we hadn’t evolved quite so far?
8
I did not find the lead photo amusing. The supposedly comical aspect of it didn't strike me as such.
Let me be clear: I have more than a few bones to pick with God. The natural order is fairly bleak, and the philosophical "problem of evil" is serious and all too real. It is what creates most atheists. It can be summed up summarily by asking, How can any truly benevolent God allow the amount of evil in this world, God's supposed creation? I understand it quite well because it kept me away from setting foot in a church for 40 years.
I like this kind of apologetics for the "natural order" about as well as I like the beauty of firefights as described by war veterans, an aesthetic judgment that it's hard to participate in (I don't typically read these, but I have read Tim O'Brien, who writes quite well). Nor do I appreciate clinical discussions of how many people need to die to keep our planet viable. If that is God's will, I have a problem with that, e.g., when a child dying of leukemia is seen as some kind of natural justice. A leveling.
So. I'm a Christian, but I'm also an animal lover, and I am protective of children: I am as appalled as anyone by the violence in the world--both human and natural. And I am resistant to people who say blithely, "Well, that's the natural order."
To my mind, "beautiful" and "unfortunate" don't work well together. "Amusing" doesn't work at all in this context. I find no humor in horror.
15
Dear NormaMcL,
If you do not suppose that nature (and its order) is real and that it predates human beings by millions of years, then you surely have the right to hold this belief.
Nevertheless, flora and fauna have been working on each other for these millions of years, long before we came along with our "modern" opinions on their ways of survival—i.e., what we now call a natural order is our way of understanding nature's "work."
It seems to me that here you're conflating an enormous amount of facts, beliefs, contradictions, religious contrivances, morals, and an ill mood to arrive at what you're offering us here.
In the end, these pictures and the nature therein were not made for us. Rather, some very talented people with a camera and some real skills captured these moments of nature—astounding, thrilling, beautiful, real, compelling moments in the life of nature itself.
Hence, these photographers received awards for their excellent photographs here. And had it not been for this NYT article, chances are very good that I and millions of others around the world would not have ever seen these glimpses of nature that provoke such a wondrously deep sense of wonderment and curiosity in what I strongly suspect is the majority of human minds around the world.
58
@NormaMcL I am not quite sure about your specific criticism. Aesthetic qualities of images (and other art forms) whether depicting actual or imagined events should be taken on their own merits. The lead photo is interesting because it is at once compelling, stunning and mundane. Events like this happen countless times on a daily basis. The tragedy of the end of the marmot's life gives life to the fox's pups. The photographer's ability to capture this exact moment shows patience, skill and luck. I accept the image of "the Fox and the Marmot" on its own merits.
Something beautiful does not necessarily mean it is good. Something ugly does not necessarily mean it is bad. Many would agree that bats are not the most attractive animals. Yet, photos of them in flight, capturing their food, huddled together in their caves are all quite wondrous. Bats are essential and should be thought of sympathetically despite their appearance. Alternatively, the photos of the events of 911 were mesmerizing and compelling. Those images are etched in so many of our minds. As stunning as those images were, the images represent evil acts. Wouldst that we had never been given an opportunity to see such images.
The world is neutral. Good and bad are human moral and ethical concepts. The lead photo shows neither a good event nor a bad one. It shows the realities of survival and death. As humans, often divorce ourselves from these realities. How many of us would eat something that we ourselves killed?
23
@NormaMcL I agree!
2